I don’t know how it plays out in the CFAR context specifically, but the sort of situation being described is this:
Alice is a social democrat and believes in redistributive taxation, a strong social safety net, and heavy government regulation. Bob is a libertarian and believes taxes should be as low as possible and “flat”, safety-nets should be provided by the community, and regulation should be light or entirely absent. Bob asks Alice[1] what she knows about some topic related to government policy. Should Alice (1) provide Bob with all the evidence she can favouring the position she holds to be correct, or (2) provide Bob with absolutely all the relevant information she knows of, or (3) provide Bob with all the information she has that someone with Bob’s existing preconceptions will find credible?
It’s tempting to do #1. Anna is saying that CFAR will do (the equivalent of) #2 or even #3.
[1] I flipped a coin to decide who would ask whom.
I don’t know how it plays out in the CFAR context specifically, but the sort of situation being described is this:
Alice is a social democrat and believes in redistributive taxation, a strong social safety net, and heavy government regulation. Bob is a libertarian and believes taxes should be as low as possible and “flat”, safety-nets should be provided by the community, and regulation should be light or entirely absent. Bob asks Alice[1] what she knows about some topic related to government policy. Should Alice (1) provide Bob with all the evidence she can favouring the position she holds to be correct, or (2) provide Bob with absolutely all the relevant information she knows of, or (3) provide Bob with all the information she has that someone with Bob’s existing preconceptions will find credible?
It’s tempting to do #1. Anna is saying that CFAR will do (the equivalent of) #2 or even #3.
[1] I flipped a coin to decide who would ask whom.
Yes. Or will seriously attempt this, at least. It seems required for cooperation and good epistemic hygiene.